to think private schools having charitable status is taking the piss

[zanz1bar]

Most private schools have their charitable status as an accident of history. Does a school like Eton really deserve the same financial status as the NSPCC.

Can it really be justified by a few subsidized places.

UQD "Private and faith-school education focus on what's best for the parent, not the child." You have to believe me when I tell you paying over £30,000 a year after tax in school fees isn't best for me. I personally get no benefit from my children's schooling. But I can see why it's convenient to think all independent parents are giving each other career leg ups, braying and scoffing Pimms together every weekend.

Ah it is Qally, that I can agree on- DH making £50 a week working for himself excludes us from HB it seems this week! He doesnt want to give up earning and providing as best he can, and we shouldn't be penalised for that (it's not the income- that'd be fair enough- but we'd qualify if he didnt work from the PC, thats the key, council consider home a workplace not a residence now )

Anyway sorry for hijack LOL

We don't own our school buildings so never raise money for capital projects. We pay for maintenance from fee income.

Not everyone is swooned by marvellouse facilities.

I know that we don't market abroad, or anywhere outside of our local area - but then we are a day school.

Bursaries are to do with the ethos and traditions of our school, not to do with league tables. They predated the obsession with league tables. We do our best for each individual pupil. For one, that might be a place at Oxford; for another it might be an art foundation course at the local tech.

As for the statement about spongers - it was an illustration of 'fairness' in society. Many members bleat on about how private schools are unfair, without looking at the other unfair things in life. At least the unfairness in private education is the result of a good work ethic - it is not an accidental unfairness. I think it is a parental instinct to give your child as many advantages as you can.

marvellous e

Sedes - you love emotive accusations. It's very entertaining but doesn't get you anywhere.

The "choice" is about the parent, not the child. Which children go there depends on whose daddy (or mummy) has the fattest wallet. If private schools are better, provide better teaching, have better facilities, etc. then hooray - but why should only a small proportion of the population be chosen to enjoy these by the number of zeroes in their parents' bank balance?

No doubt I will now be accused of "class war"...

Well ST in fairness I don't think its just the reslt of a good work ethic is it?

I know a great many parents will indeed have a stunning work ethic but so do many other lower earners- have yet to meet anyone who works harder than my Dad (who when retired from his last job at 60 took up cleaning sausage machines on a night shift rather than claim benefits (victim of pensions scandal rather than too lazy to provide for himself)))

Equally I know a great many parents whose kids go who HAVE inherited it from disatnt relatives and don't work particularly ahrd at all

It's not really fair to label poor p=eople as lacking in a work ethic any mroe than it is fair to label private school kids over priveledged brats- there's a mix across both sectors

Zeke

I (MIFLAW) seem to have misrepresented myself here.

I went to a state selective school in Kent. Every year, our school - recognised as taking the intellectual "cream" locally (including a lot of the children of academics) - would get, say, 7 people into Oxbridge.

Just down the road was a cathedral-based private school which shall remain nameless but which I had seen described in an article aimed at parents looking to send their children to private school as basically being the ideal choice for kids who were nice but dim.

That school regularly got 20 or 30 people into Oxbridge.

How is that feasible? Well, one explanation is that a lot of the masters were ex-Oxbridge and so coached from a position of experience. Class sizes were also much smaller than in my state school (selective, yes, but that still means 30+ bright kids in a room instead of 30+ mixed-ability kids). My school coached me too - two of my three coaches had applied to Oxford and been rejected, the other had got a third and had nearly been drummed out for laziness after his first year.

I ended up going to Oxford myself. There were lots of students from private school there who, I could see, were no brighter or more original of thought than friends of mine who had not made the cut.

If a bright student does not want to go to Oxbridge, that's fine. But if they do want to go and lose their place to a candidate who is no stronger but whose school is better connected and more geared up to getting them a place, that's not fine.

scienceteacher wrote "Why are you assuming these are the best pupils? The common wisdom at Mumsnet is that private school students are nice but dim. It doesn't sound as if they will up the profile of even the worst state school "

I will take this as a joke. I think that the key factor in determining the children'sw success is the parent's interest and commitment to education. Some people use economic/social class as a proxy for parental interest/commitment but that is not always an accurate indicator.

I think the independent sector can no longer be caricatured as a bunch of toffs. You have many immigrant parents that have signed up who "invest disproportionately" in independent schooling.

...parents that who have ...

I need to go back to school, clearly

TDiddy, I agee with you.

As a school governor (state school) I would love to see the talents and energies of private-school parents directed at improving the state sector. But if you have the money, who wants to use their own children towards the achievement of an ideal?

I'm sure I made this point on a different thread, but isn't there an 'insurance policy' thought process that goes on, eg - 'if I send my child to a private school there is a greater chance they'll do well academically, have good manners and lots of opportunities and probably overall do OK in life. This may also be true in a state school, but if everything goes pear-shaped I'd always be thinking - if only i'd sent him to that school.......'

I'm also lucky to have good state schools where I live and paying has never been an option for us. But in some places state schools vary between the absolutely unthinkable, to the not-quite-so-unthinkable but still pretty awful.

And some have no option but to make the unthinkable thinkable.

For a while, I lived in a country where all the private schools were nationalised. I don't think that the children suddenly became dull. The (English board) A'level results didn't decline but continued gradually improving. let's face it, we use money to buy some advantage in health and education. It is understandable that we do so for our children as education is the most enduring asset that we can bequeath.

No they shouldn't.

The majority of the population can't afford private education. I know some private school parents scrimp and save and the rest. Honestly though, for a good chunk of families, those fees are pretty much impossible.

Why on earth should the subsidise those who can afford fees?

You want better schools for your kids? Cough up and pay the fees. Or do what you can to improve your own local schools. Or (my prefered option home educate. But don't ask for money from those less well off from you.

I say this, btw, as someone who home educates, but quite possibly will send my kids to a private school in the future (steiner). I don't expect a handout for it though.

Manicmother - how do you see that talents and energies of private school parents would improve the state sector?

I have moved my DC from private to state school but I don't think anyone at the state school has been interested in poaching any good ideas from the private sector. I think there are a few samll things the state school could do better but would not dare voice them, as the impression I have is that State School heads / governors resent the existance of the private sector and would rather not know about it.

I think it would be good if private and state schools could learn from each other but can't see it happening.

"'insurance policy' thought process that goes on " - that does sum it up in one phrase ManicMother7777

I am too scared to live my political ideals with my DCs. I would rather do good elsewhere in my life. Pathetic, I know.

Oh and Tiens-SNAP!

I went to a state selective in London. They took something like 10% of the already self-selected applicants.

The kids at my school were in the main those with families who couldn't afford the fees of the local private (public) schools.

My school sent around 6 or so girls a year to oxbridge. 3 or 4 did medicine.

The local private schools sent around 20 kids a year at least to oxbridge, many more to medicine.

My brother DID go to a public school (scholarship). Again, far more oxbridge, medicine. What is noticable is looking on FriendsReunited. The kids from his school bascially run the country now, in myriad ways. The girls from my school do things like managing nail bars

(nowt wrong with running a nail bar btw.)

Fillyjonk- why do you think you are subsidises us? I think it is an elementary point to prove that the tax break that private schools get is much much less that the cost to the tax payer of us coming back into the state sector.

As far as I'm aware the labour party are running the country (or attempting to). I don't think the majority of them went to private schools.

"And some have no option but to make the unthinkable thinkable."

And in my personal experience those that attend the unthinkable schools, think they are just fine because they either don't know any different or aren't interested in education anyway.

Bit of a generalisation .....

Part of the problem with us private school parents is that having paid we like to assure ourselves that it was worth paying, which is not always the case! So some us talk as though all private schools are better than all state schools. Pre-credit crunch I had some unbelievable conversations with fellow private school parents.

You see I have to confess to sometimes having doubts that I am doing the right thing. My three most successful and driven friends are from grammar schools but that could just be a reflection on my friendship group? Truth is there is no easy answer and I certainly don't like paying three sets of school fees so it must be the "insurance fear thing" that Manicmother77777referred to

Apple

Are you aware that you come across as a clown?

TDiddy

This argument has been had at length on this thread. I would argue your view is inherently flawed. "Make your choice, pay for it if necessary, deal with it" probably summarises the case for this, but it has been spelt out much more eloquently and fully below.

Womble

Relevance?